Chuck Currie claims to be a Christian Reverend but teaches the opposite of what Jesus did on virtually any spiritual topic. I’ve addressed his false teachings several times as well as documenting his status as an unrepentant serial liar and libeller. If he was just some lone heretic he wouldn’t be worth mentioning. But he is typical of liberal theologians and their bad reasoning.
But today he really went all out. This “Christian Reverend” was put off by Brit Hume’s simple premise that Tiger should turn to Christianity to be forgiven and changed. Chuck committed multiple fallacies in attacking Brit and abandoned any pretense of being a believer. Words like his mock the cross and the blood of the martyrs. Watch the video at the bottom then consider Chuck’s text:
FOX’s Brit Hume thinks that if Tiger Woods would become a Christian all would be ok for the disgraced golfer (whose hero image was destroyed by the uncovering of numerous affairs).
Hume simply stated that Buddhism doesn’t offer the forgiveness and redemption offered by the Christian faith. Hume thinks Christianity is true and recommends it. Chuck parades as a “Christian Reverend” but does not recommend Christianity. Think about that.
I’m not offended if leaders of other faiths think their religions are true. I think they are mistaken on the facts, but they don’t offend me. It would be bizarre if they didn’t think their beliefs were true. Why is Chuck offended by Christianity? He is truly ashamed of the Gospel (see Romans 1).
Kudos to Brit Hume for his witness. May all Christians be as clear and bold when given the opportunity to state the truth.
Woods, it seems, practices Buddhism. Why Hume thinks Christianity would make Woods a better person is a mystery to me.
Wow. Uh, maybe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? Has Chuck ever read Romans, among other things? Oh, even if he has he wouldn’t believe it.
Just think of all the Christians we all know who have failed to live up to their martial vows (Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Ted Haggard, etc.). Christians fail with the best of them.
1. Maybe they are fakes like Chuck. 2. If Chuck actually understood Christianity he’d know that we don’t claim to be sinless. We’re forgiven and then sanctified over time.
But Hume’s remarks also show a deep misunderstanding of Buddhism as a religion. His remarks were pretty darn offensive, in fact, and laced with ignorance. He asserts that Christianity is better than Buddhism but it is pretty clear he has no real understanding of this great world religion.
Only a false teacher could claim that it would be offensive to advance the religion he is paid to teach. Chuck, just be honest and switch to Buddhism if you think it is true. But Chuck doesn’t appear to understand Buddhism any better than he understands Christianity.
Jesus never referred to another religion as great. He said they were false. If a “Christian” states otherwise he is fake or ignorant.
But don’t just get irritated at Chuck. He’s fulfilling his job description:
2 Corinthians 11:13-15 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Our real irritation should be aimed at the orthodox-but-wimpy Christian leaders who let people like Chuck in the pulpit.
P.S. The Christian faith is based on evidence and reason. The vast, vast majority of historical scholars, including skeptics, agree that a person named Jesus really lived and was killed on a Roman cross, that his followers believed he rose from the dead, that Jesus’ brother James went from being a skeptic to a believer and that a man named Paul went from persecuting the faith to spreading it and that he wrote most of the letters attributed to him in the Bible. Based on those and other facts the physical resurrection is a logical conclusion. More here.